BuzzerBeater Forums

It's not like we need to use Set Theory to understand this one: if I want to split the choice in 2 it's either ">=" on one side and "<" on the other; or it's ">" on one side and "<=" on the other.

In my case since the question is whether the prices are too low/not high enough, it's only logical that the status quo is included in the alternative.

The question is very simple and can be answered as yes or no. If you think prices are almost high enough for you to be indifferent vote "yes, they are still too low".

By the way, I'm a huge fan of the mentorship thread, I'd have thought that is something that would have been embedded in the game structure by now.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/15/2015 10:05:32 AM

Just to clarify: I am just curious to understand how many feel like the Transfer List is still deflated in value (prices are too low). Do you think the time needed to save money and buy that nice player that can help you now and in the future is still too short?

If you think it's too low or too high please share your reasoning with everyone. If you can provide actual examples of why you think one way or another, as E.B.W. has done, it would be terrific.

Yes, this time I'm in total agreement with you.

Option 1 = We want higher player prices, because now they are too low
Option 2 = Anything else but higher prices, be it stable or lower, because they are not too low.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/15/2015 10:03:52 AM

I'd also prefer triple choice.

There are people who repeat like a mantra that they feel prices are too low. This is asking that very question to a wider audience, isn't it?

I don't want to to have different shades: yes or no, simple. This way I just want to understand if those who scream the loudest and lecture others about it are actually in the majority.

You could also see it in another light. Do you feel we should change something in this game so that prices in the transfer list go up and players become more expensive because:
- they are still too low at the moment; and
- incidentally they are nowhere as high as they were 5 or 6 years ago

I was under the impression that quite a few people were complaining about prices being too high and not the opposite. Since I could have been wrong and since there is a very vocal group about prices being low, I just wanted to make sure I did not imagine things.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/16/2015 4:19:03 AM

This seems like a legitimate request to gauge user opinion in a completely non-biased manner. Wouldn't you agree?

1. No, Lemonshine has an agenda to see inflation increase.
2. Yes, it's either unbiased or Lemonshine has an agenda to trigger deflation.

This seems like a legitimate request to gauge user opinion in a completely non-biased manner. Wouldn't you agree?

1. No, Lemonshine has an agenda to see inflation increase.
2. Yes, it's either unbiased or Lemonshine has an agenda to trigger deflation.

Ah hrudey is back building a straw man. I knew that deep down this side of you could not have disappeared.

However logic is logic after all and anybody can understand that. Disproving a statement does not equal asserting the opposite, duh....

Wanting to check whether people believe prices should be higher, as people claim they should, is no expression of an opinion or an agenda. I dare you to find anywhere where I said that I personally believe that prices should be higher or lower. I always only reported what I felt was the majority sentiment reading the threads. Obviously you, as I'm sure others like you within the minority of users, cannot accept this very simple fact. Find anywhere where I clearly state that is my opinion was my own or where you can reasonably infer that, hrudey, please, I beg you. Otherwise I expect you to come here and correct yourself.

The only agenda here is that of people who think prices are not high enough.
These people want us to think the majority of users think the same way. Guess what? Over 80% of users do not agree that prices should increase further. Hard to swallow, I know, but we now have factual evidence that the arrogant, biased and baseless campaign cannot claim to be backed by the majority.

And I think people are well aware of the arguments in favour of having even higher prices than today. They just don't agree. Over 80% likes the status quo or desires a reduction. Let's assume they are all for the status quo. Does this satisfy you? Status quo means they do not like active campaigns, changes or whatever aimed at making prices increase further. I think this is obvious even to a child and you're no child. Therefore I will chalk off your post as a deliberate attempt to draw the conversation in the gutter by misrepresenting other people's opinions.


Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/16/2015 4:49:42 AM